Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in ruling on universities using race in admissions decisions

[Merlin99]

I think Dana Perino made a great remark on The Five - where she mentioned that
Sandra Day O’Connor said after her appointment that in 25 years - it wouldn’t be necessary. That would have been 2006. So here we are, 17 years after THAT.

I don’t know who mentioned it first - but the complaint originated with Asian students. Because they have outstanding credentials and are being discriminated against for being Asian.

SOONER or later, you have to fix the problem where it starts. By altering admissions, it’s been observed that a huge portion of admittees - don’t complete their degree. You’re doing no one favors by admitting on the basis of race if they can’t do the work.

It CAN be helped if you examine cases for admission with a bias without regard to ability to pay. Admitting someone who can’t compete is depriving a good student who can.

They have met a minimum standard to even have made it to the admitting board, after that is when they decide how many of this color or that they want.

 

[SamSpade]

They have met a minimum standard to even have made it to the admitting board, after that is when they decide how many of this color or that they want.

I read elsewhere - they do lower the standards for admission - that an Asian in the top 1% of grades and scores can be pre-empted by a black applicant only in the top 50%.

THAT isn't right. I'm fine if they both have the high scores, and they favor the black student. But not by lowering the standard. That's repulsive.
And a little insulting.

 

[GregV814]

an associate and his wife didnt have kids. as they got older, they volunteered to be surrogate family to incoming freshmen/women at the Naval Academy.

well, it got interesting. tutors, and I said tutorS outnumbered the students.

no, it wasnt Algebra I, II/Trig .... no, basic American HISTORY, GEOGRAPHY, COMPOSITION, HOW TO STUDY.



MAYBE SOME OF THE SAME TUTORS WORK WITH vp

 

[Monello]

an associate and his wife didnt have kids. as they got older, they volunteered to be surrogate family to incoming freshmen/women at the Naval Academy.

well, it got interesting. tutors, and I said tutorS outnumbered the students.

no, it wasnt Algebra I, II/Trig .... no, basic American HISTORY, GEOGRAPHY, COMPOSITION, HOW TO STUDY.



MAYBE SOME OF THE SAME TUTORS WORK WITH vp

Let me guess, football players?

 

[herb749]

I’m glad that black responders were able to “clarify” her own racism. Libs cannot understand that their “compassion” is actually condescension.

So all she's saying is black people can't achieve without liberal white people. Still keeping them on the plantation.

 

[SamSpade]

So all she's saying is black people can't achieve without liberal white people. Still keeping them on the plantation.

I heard this crap on every liberal channel and station - that without this, a person of color has NO chance of success in academics.

Really? So every POC *must* have someone run interference for them, because none can actually get there on their own? Can no one see that as insulting? Condescending? Why don’t y’all just say what you’re thinking - that they’re not as smart as you?

Bigot.

 

[Merlin99]

I heard this crap on every liberal channel and station - that without this, a person of color has NO chance of success in academics.

Really? So every POC *must* have someone run interference for them, because none can actually get there on their own? Can no one see that as insulting? Condescending? Why don’t y’all just say what you’re thinking - that they’re not as smart as you?

Bigot.

The worst part of this is every black person, regardless of their abilities, is tarred with the same brush- they were an affirmative action hire.

 

[GURPS]

Erica Marsh has more thoughts.

Now, I didn’t just tumble off the latest turnip delivery drone. To be sure Erica was real, as I have learned to do, I checked chatty Erica’s extensive account history seeing that she had lots of tweets over time, noting she had over 130,000 loyal liberal followers, had a verified account, and I saw that she often responded to comments in her threads.

But, dang it, I missed the one dead giveaway, the fact that her super-popular account was only just created a few months ago in September, 2022.

Some people even more suspicious than me dug into the sordid story, and now it looks like Erica was in fact a highly-sophisticated pysop bot, most likely run by a shady Belgian political consulting group that used the very same cute blonde model in other campaigns. Then investigators figured out that Erica’s photo was AI generated and the lid blew off.

In other words, there’s not even a ‘real’ model behind the fake Erica. She’s 100% artificially generated.

After the story began exploding all over Twitter, it suspended the fake Erica account. One supposes the Twitter team looked into her a little deeper and discovered Erica was really an AI body snatcher.

The fake account — which again, was verified — was very careful and very sophisticated. Reviewers noted that only 5% of its tweets were politically outrageous. The other 95% were just run of the mill, pro-democrat, liberal woke platitudes. Here’s a quick sample:



Take a look at the numbers of likes and re-tweets from fake Erica’s anti-Ashli screeds. The account was obviously very successful at spreading hateful woke messages, thoughts, and ideas.

But the Erica bot has now imploded (exploded? Melted down? Blew a fuse? Our vocabulary needs another expansion) and is now gone. It’s too bad, in a way, since the psyop team running the account obviously put a bunch of work into it. Oh well.

The Fake Erica story was just the tip of the iceberg.

☕️ LIMITATIONS ☙ Monday, July 3, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

A deep-dive into deep-state manipulation, DNC bots, mind control, and Twitter's annoying new policy requiring a user account to view tweets.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[PeoplesElbow]

I heard this crap on every liberal channel and station - that without this, a person of color has NO chance of success in academics.

Really? So every POC *must* have someone run interference for them, because none can actually get there on their own? Can no one see that as insulting? Condescending? Why don’t y’all just say what you’re thinking - that they’re not as smart as you?

Bigot.

I've worked with POC that this was absolutely not true. I didn't want to push much but a couple of them still believed that they needed AA to succeed when it was clear they could succeed on their merits. Also knew a POC that was average in the job that was so against the idea of AA he would have rather struggled on his own, was actually an excellent worker but sometimes I felt bad for him because he held himself down on occasion.

 

[Clem72]

Universities care very much about diversity. Until it comes time to pick who makes the football and basketball teams. There diversity isn't really a cherished value as much as a diverse student body.

Can't field a competitive program in either of those sports if you only allow the top tier students in the school. But as far as I am aware that's the entire premise of athletic scholarships and not really the subject of this ruling.

 

[GURPS]

 

[seekeroftruth]

It also discriminates against other races, such as Asians, Middle Eaterners and Indians (whom I realize are also Asians, but not always thought of that way), who tend to be exceptional students.

My sentiment about affirmative action is that after nearly sixty years - if it isn't accomplishing its goal, it probaly won't. Any program with an actual eventual defined goal MUST HAVE some kind of metric to determine if it has achieved or made progress towards it - and must have the ability to adjust and self-correct to get there.

The premise was to tilt the outcome in hopes that it would become self-sustaining. Have highly educated minority students who would in turn by virtue of their success - bring about change to their families and so forth. Well it didn't happen. The problem with minority admissions isn't discrimination - it's that schools they go to are poor, teachers IN those schools aren't trained enough, the environments they are in are - troubled - and the world many of them grow up in isn't conducive to academic success.

Back in the days of Clinton and Gore.... I worked as an office manager at RBP Associates. Bob Patterson wrote software that would allow Congress to track Affirmative Action decisions. It's been a long time... the wording was a lot better than my poor brain could pull up this morning... but they use software track fairness.

Affirmative Action was only to be used WHEN ALL ELSE IS EQUAL. It was only to be used if you had two applicants equally talented... then you could use Affirmative Action as the tie breaker.

It was also to be a number that was like the population. If there were 100 purple people and only one orange person... The requirement was still to be 100 to 1 to reflect the population. If the 1 never got a chance.... then Affirmative Action was supposed to kick in to be a tie breaker. If the orange guy presented an application as good as any of the 100 purple people... then Affirmative Action would get the orange person the hand up.

It was a great thing in its day. Today, it's not used correctly. I'm not happy that the Supreme Court did away with it in college admissions... but I am sad it's wasn't used as intended lately.

 

[SamSpade]

Back in the days of Clinton and Gore.... I worked as an office manager at RBP Associates. Bob Patterson wrote software that would allow Congress to track Affirmative Action decisions. It's been a long time... the wording was a lot better than my poor brain could pull up this morning... but they use software track fairness.

Affirmative Action was only to be used WHEN ALL ELSE IS EQUAL. It was only to be used if you had two applicants equally talented... then you could use Affirmative Action as the tie breaker.

It was also to be a number that was like the population. If there were 100 purple people and only one orange person... The requirement was still to be 100 to 1 to reflect the population. If the 1 never got a chance.... then Affirmative Action was supposed to kick in to be a tie breaker. If the orange guy presented an application as good as any of the 100 purple people... then Affirmative Action would get the orange person the hand up.

It was a great thing in its day. Today, it's not used correctly. I'm not happy that the Supreme Court did away with it in college admissions... but I am sad it's wasn't used as intended lately.

And you know, I am 100% in favor of this approach. It eliminates the concept that all things being equal, the person making the job choice went with their own race or their own sentiments - either because of bigotry or just because they preferred someone like that. A person who absolutely has earned the spot is given it.

That is not how I know it happened - and possibly STILL happens - in my workplace. In a nutshell - they try to SIMPLIFY the process by assembling a point system (I have heard that college admissions have been done this way). So requisite scores, class standing, grades and so forth are tallied and given a score - but race is also given one. Preference is also given to things like - employees already employed within and direct matching on their application to items wanted on the job announcement.

If the bonus for "race" is large enough, it can erase gains or losses attributable to insufficient grades, test scores and so forth.

I went to an engineering school forty years ago that wanted more WOMEN to be admitted. They admitted a HUGE portion of women in one given year, to try and tip the scales. By the end of the first semester, easily half had flunked out. The newly created freshman women's dorms were mostly empty. By the next year, men were in there.

And they learned, if you want women in engineering - you must RECRUIT them. Actively seek them out, because if you just ADMIT them, the curricula doesn't change and if they can't do it, they won't make it.

Guess what? This is STILL a problem with minority admissions - much higher failure rate, because they cannot make it through the courses.

 

[GURPS]

The Wall Street Journal ran another uplifting, counter-revolutionary lawfare story Tuesday, headlined “Activist Behind Supreme Court Affirmative Action Cases Is Now Suing Law Firms.” The sub-headline explained, “Ed Blum’s organization accuses firms offering fellowships for diverse candidates of racial discrimination against straight, white men.”

Ed Blum started the American Alliance for Equal Rights two years ago, advocating to end “affirmative-action.” Separately this summer, in a case involving Harvard College and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Supreme Court overturned nearly 50 years of race-conscious affirmative action at colleges and universities.

Fueled by that ruling, earlier this month the Alliance sued an Atlanta-based venture-capital firm fund that only supports Black small businesswomen. The lawsuit accused the VC firm of unlawful racial discrimination. On Tuesday, the Alliance filed two more lawsuits, this time against two prominent democrat-connected law firms, Perkins Coie and Morrison & Foerster, that only give fellowships to diversity candidates.

According to the story, the law firms’ fellowship positions are open only to applicants who are ‘students of color,’ ‘students who identify as LGBTQ+,’ or ‘students with disabilities,’ and other similar wacky categories that have nothing whatsoever to do with legal skill, and which include five-figure starting bonuses and salaries right out of law school starting at $200,000 and up.

Straight white men need not apply, regardless of law school grades, accomplishments, or capabilities. So.

Blum’s newest lawsuits accuse the two Big Law firms of violating Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which bars racial bias in private contracts.

You might wonder why a giant law firm would disregard the best candidates, and instead hire people based on skin color or atypical sexual preferences, who barely passed law school. Don’t the clients object? Don’t clients want the best lawyers working on their cases?

Not when your biggest customer is the government. When your biggest customer is the government, you hire the lawyers that the government wants. If the government doesn’t want smart lawyers, but only lawyers of a certain color or who have sex a certain way or with certain types of people, then you hire those lawyers.

Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman once famously said, “whenever you see a distortion in the market, look for the withered hand of government.”

Well. There it is. Right there.

Best wishes to Ed Blum for his terrific counter-revolutionary work, and we hope to see him (or his lawyers) arguing at the Supreme Court soon.

☕️ CRUEL AND UNUSUAL☙ Thursday, August 24, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Multiplier; thoughts about the debates/interview; goodbye Prighozin, or is it?; BRICS balloons; media rescues Big Pharma, again; Hawaii killed people with roadblocks; SBF suffers; Big Law woes; more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com